HAVi (1394 home theater) -- Why doesn't Apple use this

macrumors 6502

Has anyone heard anything at all about Apple using HAVi with perhaps the iPod, or with the computers themselves? I have a Mitsubishi TV with Firewire ports on it to connect other Firewire devices so I can control the devices from the TV and perhaps stream audio or video through to the TV... I've been hoping to find something that Apple is doing or someone is doing to use this with my Mac... like hook up my powermac and be able to view the desktop on my tv (through the firewire) or hook up my iPod and stream audio through firewire to the tv or something...

macrumors 68040

Yeah, we bought my dad a 65" HDTV Mitsubishi last XMas, and one model up would have had the firewire ports.

Look. The point of the firewire ports are so clear.

You know how to connect...say....your DVD to your Reciever, and then your reciever to your TV, you have like 10 cables. Audio/Video out from DVD, sometimes optical, cable, satellite, VCR, Amp/Tuner/Reciever. Well, now its just ONE firewire cable from each device connecting to another. It carries Audio, Video, etc. all in super duper digital quality!

macrumors 6502a

Originally posted by MacAztec Yeah, we bought my dad a 65" HDTV Mitsubishi last XMas, and one model up would have had the firewire ports.

Look. The point of the firewire ports are so clear.

You know how to connect...say....your DVD to your Reciever, and then your reciever to your TV, you have like 10 cables. Audio/Video out from DVD, sometimes optical, cable, satellite, VCR, Amp/Tuner/Reciever. Well, now its just ONE firewire cable from each device connecting to another. It carries Audio, Video, etc. all in super duper digital quality!

Its awesome!

Click to expand...

Does that mean that I will need to buy a Mitsubishi DVD player, HT system, or VCR to use the feature? Thanks, but I'll stick with Bose and some cable mess.

However, I think I saw an ad to use a Mitsu. TV as a means to control your home automation system, which it kind of cool.

macrumors 68040

macrumors 603

I wonder if this is part of what the IP over Firewire deal was for? Nobody could quite figure out why Apple had suddenly released this without any explaination or obvious purpose. Maybe they are planning to make this work with the new machines at MacWorld and just wanted to get the software out for testing.

macrumors 6502a

Originally posted by cr2sh Firewire ports on a TV? That has to be the coolest feature ever... but I'm not sure I see the point. Sure, you could hook up Digital Cameras... but do what? record to a tape?

Click to expand...

You can record to a VCR or a DVD player!!!
Here in Japan, there are a lot of DVD Players/recorders with Firewire/iLink so you can record directly to a DVD!!!

macrumors 65816

mmmmm, ip over fire is for networking..... i don't it's anyting beyond that, no secret 'thin' clients in the works or other appliances devices.... it's just a useful thing to have. before apple released their's another software was already available, at a price, firenet. i used it for a while and found it very useful, since i'm cheap and didn't want to, nor had any real reason to buy a hub.

additionally with firewire 2, if the ip over fire is developed that will be mighty fast.

macrumors newbie

I own a 55" Mitsu big screen with the firewire ports.
The reason for them is future interconnectivity between your firewire stereo, VCR, DVD. It was intended to simplify hookup and to eliminate many wires.
It was a nice idea for the simpleton but more expensive than it's worth at this point.

macrumors newbie

The reason for them is future interconnectivity between your firewire stereo, VCR, DVD. It was intended to simplify hookup and to eliminate many wires.
It was a nice idea for the simpleton but more expensive than it's worth at this point.

Click to expand...

The cost equation for Firewire is likely to change soon. With the introduction of "Firewire II" (aka1394b) devices will have the option of running in a simplified 'beta mode'. It's understanding that beta mode is ideal for simple consumer A/V connections that don't require device-control capabilities of a hard drive or camcorder.

Translation: in the next two years, every HDTV is going to have a 1394b jack on the back of it. For basic A/V in & out, 1394b beta-mode is supposed to offer a more efficient use of silicon than (and hence cheaper alternative to) USB 2.

FWIW I own an HDTV rig, and believe me the promise of a single-cable, full-digital, and lossless connection between my components is very attractive. Right now I have four components (2 game systems, DVD player, satellite box) each with four cables coming off each them: three RCA for component video, one optical for audio. Needless to say this is a complete mess.

<RANT>
Could someone answer the following riddle for me? Why, oh why did the consumer electronics manufactuers decide on using three individual RCA cables for component video connections?!? The Europeans have a single cable in the SCART connector. The computer industry settled on the 15-pin VGA Dsub long ago. And don't give me that insulation/singal integrity excuse, becuase I can run a computer monitor via analog VGA cable at resolutions much higher than HDTV with beatitful results.

The conspiracy theorist in my says someone like Moster Cable must've done a good bit of lobbying... <g>
</RANT>

macrumors member

FYI: The rule with FireWire, as with any other electrical transmission, is that signal loss is proportional to length of cable. This is inevitable. WIth FireWire and USB, the loss is much less noticeable, since all signals are digital. So, the signal will hafta degrade a WHOLE LOT for the receiver to pick up a 1 as a 0.

As for the multiple cables of component video - this is just pure speculation - but it might have been done to decrease manufacturing costs. Think about it, the computer VGA standard was made since there wasn't anything that could handle its signals before. RCA cables already have adequate bandwidth for component video, since resolution is only bumped up maybe 4x, to 1080i at most. So, having to create entirely new assembly lines and dies for a new transmission system wouldn't be good business, if you could just order more of the same stuff e.g. 3 CA connections.

FireWire promised it would be incorporated into VCRs, DVD players, TVs, Dolby receivers, and everything else that has a power plug right when it came out. The possibilities with computer hookups were, i think, just not seen back then. This i.Link HDTV connection stuff coming out now was what FireWire's creators wanted from the beginning for their dear little plug.

But, I don't think it'll totally take over RCA stuff, since RCA connections are too firmly etched in the electronics industry. It would be like Xbox trying to compete with PS2 (I have an Xbox, BTW). It'll never catch up, unless it can offer something revolutionary and 30 times better, since it has no installed base, whereas RCA connections are found in every single piece of A/V electronics in your living room/family room/bedroom.

I think FireWire will, in the long run, either hafta improve a LOT (a.k.a FireWire2, FireWire3) or it'll stay like it is now: a cable to serve your iMac, iPod, and digicam.

macrumors newbie

Originally posted by GrandShenlong Sorry for double-posting, but in reply to dglow.

The connections between your HDTV (if it's big) and your A/V/ stuff usually are much longer than the connections between your computer and your monitor.

I've never tried this, but I think that your analog-connected monitor MAY show some artifacting if you ran 10 feet of analog VGA cable instead of the usual 4-6 feet. Then again, I could be dead wrong.

Click to expand...

grandshenlong...
and firewire is rated to sustain itself over longer distances than a/v cables. 27 feet is not unheard of for a single cable (without significant data loss w/ video and audio), but thats not the only way Firewire is superior to regular a/v cabling... you see its not just one cable that carries video and audio, its one strand that connects the whole system. If you were to diagram the current way of hooking up devices, you would have a radial collection of discreet connections from each device directly to the receiver, it would look like a web and use a lot of long cables. Using firewire, your diagram would be linear with no apparent center or forced hookup order for the devices. what we find with this is that the cables are shorter, and there are fewer of them.

as an example of how much impact firewire could have... think about how many ports are on the back of your reciever... firewire in its current incarnation can replace all of them with 1 firewire port. I would be happier with 2, but it can be done with 1. heck, why not give yourself 4 total ports and have a separate strand dedicated to audio... its still at least 12 less ports than i have currently.

This makes firewire much better (in this application) than ethernet, which has many of the weakness that haunt the current crop of consumer electronics... a network of dedicated connections, needless redundancy in cabling (in light of firewire) extraneous, confusing rear panel installation, and marginal compatibility issues (manufacturer A and manufacturer B use different standards for their connectors, who gets screwed? the consumer).

If you need a signal boost? firewire repeaters do a much more efficient job at making the signal travel over seriously long distances (trust me 90 feet is a way do-able for the current incarnation of firewire)

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.